Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) vs New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF)

Side-by-side pension health comparison from DOL and public plan data

Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) and New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) are meaningfully apart on the LakeQuality pension-health rubric: Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) grades A while New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) grades C. Funding ratios: 85% vs 48%.

Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) comes out ahead on the composite rubric. For a participant in either plan, the spread is informative but not directly actionable — pension participation is not portable, so the relevant question is what each plan's funded-status trajectory means for that participant's benefit security.

Verdict

Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) at 51/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 36.7 percentage points (84.8% vs 48.1%). Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) covers 372,000 participants.

MetricIowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS)New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF)
Health Score
Composite of funding ratio, trend, and PBGC risk
80/100 (A)*51/100 (C)
Funding Ratio
Assets as % of liabilities (100%+ is fully funded)
84.8%*48.1%
Total Assets$35.5B$28.5B
Total Liabilities$41.9B*$59.3B
Unfunded Liability$6.4B*$30.8B
Participants372,000268,000
1-Year Investment Return6.4%*4.9%
Plan Typepublicpublic
PBGC Risk Levellowhigh
SponsorState of IowaState of New Jersey

Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) has a stronger Pension Health Score of 80/100 (A) compared to New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) at 51/100 (C). Funding ratios differ by 36.7 percentage points (84.8% vs 48.1%). Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) covers 372,000 participants.

Explore More